Truckee River Flood Project Working Group FINAL MINUTES WEDNESDAY ~ FEBRUARY 25, 2009 ~ 3:00 P.M. Washoe County Department of Water Resources Conference Room 4930 Energy Way, Reno, Nevada 1. INTRODUCTIONS Naomi Duerr – Flood Project Director, opened the meeting at approximately 3:00 p.m. and reordered the agenda. 5. TRACTION PROJECTS – A) Virginia Street Bridge - Phase II Design; and B) Lower Mustang Restoration [Taken out of agenda order] Naomi Duerr – Flood Project Director, commented that Jay Aldean, Paul Urban and she had just returned from a Reno City Council meeting at which the Virginia Street Bridge was discussed. The discussion focused on the level of protection, bridge design and the like. It appears that the design supported by the Working Group - no piers in the channel – might be appropriate as did the City of Reno staff with an above supported bridge. Ms. Duerr noted that she had been asked to comment on the presentation and expressed her support of the Reno staff’s recommendation. The Reno City Council expressed their support for the under supported design that she was unaware of. Ms. Duerr stated that the City Council had supported the 100-year level of protection with two feet of freeboard. Reno staff will move forward with design options including a draw bridge, which apparently is nearly twice the cost. The concerns include view and other historic aspects of the river corridor. The cost estimates provided for the draw bridge design may have been for a more robust and larger structure(s) that accommodates large ocean going type vessels. During the discussion it was suggested that an under-supported bridge complicates water flows and that the concern expressed during the City Council meeting was obstruction of view by above supported bridges. It was explained that a clear span under supported bridge would have a larger beam with some elevation and ramping. The intent is to make recommendations that provide a clear view of the Truckee River while maintaining the same flow characteristics as an above supported bridge. Ms. Duerr re-introduced Susie Kapahee who will function as the support liaison to the Working Group for agenda items and point of contact for information. Susie Kapahee – Public Information Officer, commented that she could be reached at 775-850-7456 if there are any questions or requests for additional information. PRESENT: Connie Butts – Canyon General Improvement District; Franco Crivelli – Community Coalition; John Dyer – AMFC; Mark Forest – HDR; Marge Frandsen – citizen; Dennis Ghiglieri – Truckee River Yacht Club; Tom Greco – Regional Flood Project Working Group – DRAFT Minutes February 25, 2009 Page 2 of 13 Transportation Commission; Vicki Healey – University of Nevada, Reno - Government Relations; Mary Horvath – Wood Rodgers; John Jackson – Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe; Noel Laughlin – HDR; Debra Lemke – Michael Baker Jr. Inc.; Dennis Miller – Storey County; Shirley Miller – Rainbow Bend Homeowners’ Association; Garth Oksol – Regional Transportation Commission; Kevin Piper – University of Nevada, Reno Main Station Farm; David Potter – United States Fish and Wildlife Service; Jerry Purdy – citizen; Bob Ramsey – Rosewood Lakes Homeowners’ Association; Scott Smith – Kleinfelder; Rose Strickland – Sierra Club; Candace Siwarga – Kennedy Jenks; and Todd Welty – Reno Tahoe Airport Authority. STAFF PRESENT: Jay Aldean, Naomi Duerr, Mimi Fujii-Strickler Danielle Henderson Susie Kapahee, Greg Salter and Paul Urban. 3. UPDATE ON FLOOD PROJECT BILL DRAFT REQUEST [Taken out of agenda order] Naomi Duerr – Flood Project Director, commented that the region needs a way forward to identify and collect additional funding for the Flood Project based on the benefits received from a Flood Project in lieu of other taxes such as sales tax and the like. A Flood Funding Study and Benefits Analysis is underway to determine the level of funding from specific areas. A vote of the three elected bodies in a joint meeting in February 2009 supported the concept of a JPA (Joint Powers Agreement) similar to that used for the Western Regional Water Commission and TMWA (Truckee Meadows Water Authority). The intent of the JPA is to allow the region to continue the governance of the Flood Project in a manner similar to what is being currently being used. Ms. Duerr noted that Deputy District Attorney Greg Salter had worked with bond counsel and others to develop the legislative proposal. Ms. Duerr then outlined the legislative process and drew attention to the Living River Map, and explained that the LPP (Locally Preferred Plan) includes flood proofing in addition to flood walls and levees. Ms. Duerr noted that +9.000 buildings have been flood proofed by the Corps (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers) nationwide at a far lesser cost that building a flood wall or levee. Ms. Duerr noted the flood proofing has been proposed for some homes in Hidden Valley (Pebble Beach) as well as the Eastside Subdivision in lieu of the more costly levees/flood walls proposed by the Corps. The floodwalls/levees would, in some instances take most of the rear yard for most homes. The Nevada Constitution prohibits the use of public funds on privately owned property. The cost saving of nearly $40- million can be achieved using the home elevation/flood proofing of property. AB54 was introduced by Washoe County to deal with water quality issues involving both private domestic well, county owned municipal wells and septic systems. The intent is to provide financial assistance to homeowners in connecting to community water or sewer services. The legislation was amended to include the Flood Project and fund the flood proofing and building elevation as an alternative to construction of a levee or flood wall. During the discussion it was noted that the Flood Project staff has conducted a significant amount of public outreach and that the FPCC (Flood Project Coordinating Flood Project Working Group – DRAFT Minutes February 25, 2009 Page 3 of 13 Committee) has emphasized their intent to conduct a number of public workshops on the rate, tolls or charges that may be levied for the local cost share for construction of the Flood Project. The 30-day public comment period is designed to set a timeline for objections and comments on the proposed rates, tolls and charges. It was pointed out that rates for public utilities including electrical and gas services as well as water and sewer services are not subject to a public vote. It was noted that the local jurisdictions already have the ability to impose rates, tolls and charges. The proposed legislation will provide specific authority for the local jurisdictions to enact rates, tolls and charges under specific circumstances that provide a benefit roughly equal to the rate, toll or charge being collected. The expectation that the governing body of the JPA will be similar to what is already in place and may or may not include non-voting members, UNR (University of Nevada, Reno) or others. It was explained that a Flood Board could be formed under existing statutes and would not be required to include other entities such as Storey County or the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe. The JPA, as proposed, allows the region to include other jurisdictions that also benefit from the Flood Project including, but not limited to: Story County and the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe. It was noted that Clark County has already established a Flood Control District and imposed a ¼-cent sales tax. This legislation allows Washoe County to impose the fees needed to fund the local sponsor cost share. The fee will be charged to existing and future residents as well as local governments. It was pointed out that the rates, tolls and charges could not be applied to those living in Washoe County. It was determined that the flood benefits areas should not include certain areas of Washoe County and focus on those areas that actually flood in Reno, Sparks Industrial and other areas as well as those located in close proximity to the flood prone areas with those in the flood prone areas paying somewhat more than the general benefit area. It was pointed out that rental properties would pay their fee through the property owner who will be billed for a portion of the project. It was noted that the City of Sparks has already implemented a $5.00 per month charge as their portion of the local cost share. Other discussion noted that new development must be mitigated and constructed in a fashion that does not have any detrimental effect on the flood project. Once the official Washoe County population that currently exceeds 400,000 individuals is verified in the 2010 census a global change to NRS (Nevada Revised Statutes) that are written to cover Clark County only would take place. Other discussion focused on the anticipated cost of the overall Flood Project that currently is estimated at $1.6-billion. It was emphasized that only the FPCC has the power to determine the size, scope and ultimately the costs and rates, tolls and charges to fund the Flood Project. 2. APPROVE WORKING GROUP MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 2009 The motion maker and second were inaudible. An unknown speaker questioned the verbiage on page 7, about understatement of project costs and TRAction Projects coming in at about half the Corps (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers) estimate. Flood Project Working Group – DRAFT Minutes February 25, 2009 Page 4 of 13 Naomi Duerr – Flood Project Director, commented that there are two choices strike the sentence or write two sentences that clarify the intent. Ms. Duerr believes that Paul is right and that Bob combined two concepts: 1) the global projects have been understated; and 2) individual projects, some of them so far have been overstated such as Reno Sparks Indian Colony, 102 Ranch and Lockwood have all had project costs higher than what they actually cost.